Why do you think the results would be any better for Canada+ (even assuming anyone could explain the difference)?
I'd be surprised if more than 5% of people - generously - could explain what is *actually* in the Chequers proposal.
Yep.
That doesn’t matter. They’ve taken against the named idea whatever it might be. Zero legitimacy Brexit is coming.
I don’t think enough Brexiteers realise we’ll be heading straight back in off, say, Labour winning in GE2022 without Corbyn as leader on a rejoin referendum platform if that takes place.
Blame master strategists Davis, Johnson and Rees-Mogg. After they came out against it, Chequers stood no chance of commanding the approval of most Leavers. Now that Boris Johnson has called it a betrayal and touted a conspiracy theory that elements of the government are seeking to sabotage Brexit, the idea is deader than flares.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
there's no consensus among leavers either. If we stayed on what basis would it be ?
Brexit is an issue which divides
all we have seen is our political class is not up to putting a sensible proposal to the other side and reaching a view as to what works best for all/ Or respecting a vote.
Oddly this p[aralysis will probably produce a fudge which matches mood of the electorate
Yes, but we need to all fall in behind some form of practical Brexit that lets us move on, for now, or we risk the whole thing being immediately reversed as soon as there’s a change in Government.
I don’t want to end up in the euro in less than 10 years.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. legitimacy.
there's no consensus among leavers either. If we stayed on what basis would it be ?
Oddly this p[aralysis will probably produce a fudge which matches mood of the electorate
Yes, but we need to all fall in behind some form of practical Brexit that lets us move on, for now, or we risk the whole thing being immediately reversed as soon as there’s a change in Government.
I don’t want to end up in the euro in less than 10 years.
I suspect .
But if everyone hates it then that might make the “old” EU membership look attractive by comparison and a create a political appetite to pursue it, even if that is still disliked by a large minority.
The floating voter in British politics mustn’t conclude that Leavers will rail against the UK’s relationship with the EU regardless. If they do, they risk concluding that they may as well stay in with that railing going on, rather than outside with everyone railing against it.
I wonder if you’re overthinking this.
Brexit barely breaks the consciousness of the floating voter. We need to get a deal, and then move on.
But Chequers has been rejected by everyone. Time to move on to a deal Btw, I’ve been similarly staggered at how poorly the Govt have communicated the Chequers plan. May and Hammond have a similar approach; neither seem willing to talk up their main job of work!
I haven’t rejected Chequers. I have read it, and seem to be one of the very few that has.
I’d encourage you and everyone else to do the same. I thought it was the right strategic balance, for now, for the UK and is actually quite a hard Brexit.
I read it too. There are aspects I really don't like, particularly the degree of alignment required, but I would live with it as a deal to allow us to move on. I would prefer a Canada + or even ++ but I just don't think there is time for that now.
Why do you think the results would be any better for Canada+ (even assuming anyone could explain the difference)?
I'd be surprised if more than 5% of people - generously - could explain what is *actually* in the Chequers proposal.
Yep.
That's not entirely fair or true. Leave voters might not be attuned to every detail of Chequers, but they take their cue from people who DO understand it, principally David Davis and Boris Johnson, who debated and agreed the damn thing, and are quite clued up about Brexit, given that they have been trying (and failing) to negotiate it.
Bojo and Davis dislike Chequers so much they have resigned, so Leave voters have concluded that if the experts say it is shite, then it must be shite. That is a fair and rational conclusion. This is the kind of politics Remainers like, isn't it? Expert MPs make the decisions and express their opinions, the voters adjust their attitudes accordingly.
The problem with this theory is that there isn't a real expert in diplomacy or trade policy, ie NOT Davis or Johnson, who thinks Chequers will see light of day. At best it's a fiction that might be maintained long enough to agree the NI backstop and get over the line to "transition". The even bigger problem is that there isn't a realistic outcome that isn't shite. This includes remaining in the EU, now we have rejected it in a referendum. Leave voters certainly won't hold themselves responsible for the inevitable clusterfuck, despite voting for it.
Why do you think the results would be any better for Canada+ (even assuming anyone could explain the difference)?
I'd be surprised if more than 5% of people - generously - could explain what is *actually* in the Chequers proposal.
Yep.
That doesn’t matter. They’ve taken against the named idea whatever it might be. Zero legitimacy Brexit is coming.
I don’t think enough Brexiteers realise we’ll be heading straight back in off, say, Labour winning in GE2022 without Corbyn as leader on a rejoin referendum platform if that takes place.
Blame master strategists Davis, Johnson and Rees-Mogg. After they came out against it, Chequers stood no chance of commanding the approval of most Leavers. Now that Boris Johnson has called it a betrayal and touted a conspiracy theory that elements of the government are seeking to sabotage Brexit, the idea is deader than flares.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
there's no consensus among leavers either. If we stayed on what basis would it be ?
Brexit is an issue which divides
all we have seen is our political class is not up to putting a sensible proposal to the other side and reaching a view as to what works best for all/ Or respecting a vote.
Oddly this p[aralysis will probably produce a fudge which matches mood of the electorate
Yes, but we need to all fall in behind some form of practical Brexit that lets us move on, for now, or we risk the whole thing being immediately reversed as soon as there’s a change in Government.
I don’t want to end up in the euro in less than 10 years.
Why do you think the results would be any better for Canada+ (even assuming anyone could explain the difference)?
.
Blame master strategi flares.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. legitimacy.
there's no consensus among leavers either. If we stayed on what basis would it be ?
Oddly this p[aralysis will probably produce a fudge which matches mood of the electorate
I suspect .
But if everyone hates it then that might make the “old” EU membership look attractive by comparison and a create a political appetite to pursue it, even if that is still disliked by a large minority.
it.
I wonder if you’re overthinking this.
Brexit barely breaks the consciousness of the floating voter. We need to get a deal, and then move on.
But Chequers has been rejected by everyone. Time to move on to a deal Btw, I’ve been similarly staggered at how poorly the Govt have communicated the Chequers plan. May and Hammond have a similar approach; neither seem willing to talk up their main job of work!
I haven’t rejected Chequers. I have read it, and seem to be one of the very few that has.
I’d encourage you and everyone else to do the same. I thought it was the right strategic balance, for now, for the UK and is actually quite a hard Brexit.
I’ve read it. At the time it was published I suggested that it would be just about the bounds of acceptability, but that I didn’t see the EU accepting it.
They haven’t. And May isn’t going to be able to sell it to the British people either. Time to move on to something else.
But, from the Guardian article, there are straws in the wind that the EU counteroffer will be very similar.
I don’t think enough Brexiteers realise we’ll be heading straight back in off, say, Labour winning in GE2022 without Corbyn as leader on a rejoin referendum platform if that takes place.
Blame master strategists Davis, Johnson and Rees-Mogg. After they came out against it, Chequers stood no chance of commanding the approval of most Leavers. Now that Boris Johnson has called it a betrayal and touted a conspiracy theory that elements of the government are seeking to sabotage Brexit, the idea is deader than flares.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
there's no consensus among leavers either. If we stayed on what basis would it be ?
Brexit is an issue which divides
all we have seen is our political class is not up to putting a sensible proposal to the other side and reaching a view as to what works best for all/ Or respecting a vote.
Oddly this p[aralysis will probably produce a fudge which matches mood of the electorate
Yes, but we need to all fall in behind some form of practical Brexit that lets us move on, for now, or we risk the whole thing being immediately reversed as soon as there’s a change in Government.
I don’t want to end up in the euro in less than 10 years.
Oh don't be ridiculous. It's only politics. There are much more important things to worry about. Like who is going to open the batting for England, for a start.
Why do you think the results would be any better for Canada+ (even assuming anyone could explain the difference)?
.
Blame master strategi flares.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. legitimacy.
there's no consensus among leavers either. If we stayed on what basis would it be ?
Oddly this p[aralysis will probably produce a fudge which matches mood of the electorate
I suspect .
But if everyone hates it then that might make the “old” EU membership look attractive by comparison and a create a political appetite to pursue it, even if that is still disliked by a large minority.
it.
I haven’t rejected Chequers. I have read it, and seem to be one of the very few that has.
I’d encourage you and everyone else to do the same. I thought it was the right strategic balance, for now, for the UK and is actually quite a hard Brexit.
I’ve read it. At the time it was published I suggested that it would be just about the bounds of acceptability, but that I didn’t see the EU accepting it.
They haven’t. And May isn’t going to be able to sell it to the British people either. Time to move on to something else.
But, from the Guardian article, there are straws in the wind that the EU counteroffer will be very similar.
Yes, I read that too.
But I also listened to the French Europe minister on R4 last week, and saw the cool European reaction to the way the British press read too much into Barnier’s comments last week.
The offer will be something like NI backstop and free movement.
Both of which won’t be anywhere near possible for us to accept.
Why do you think the results would be any better for Canada+ (even assuming anyone could explain the difference)?
.
Blame master strategi flares.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. legitimacy.
there's no consensus among leavers either. If we stayed on what basis would it be ?
Oddly this p[aralysis will probably produce a fudge which matches mood of the electorate
I suspect .
But if everyone hates it then that might make the “old” EU membership look attractive by comparison and a create a political appetite to pursue it, even if that is still disliked by a large minority.
it.
I haven’t rejected Chequers. I have read it, and seem to be one of the very few that has.
I.
I’ve read it. At the time it was published I suggested that it would be just about the bounds of acceptability, but that I didn’t see the EU accepting it.
They haven’t. And May isn’t going to be able to sell it to the British people either. Time to move on to something else.
But, from the Guardian article, there are straws in the wind that the EU counteroffer will be very similar.
Yes, I read that too.
But I also listened to the French Europe minister on R4 last week, and saw the cool European reaction to the way the British press read too much into Barnier’s comments last week.
The offer will be something like NI backstop and free movement.
Both of which won’t be anywhere near possible for us to accept.
I wouldn’t take too much notice of either the press or the politicians.
This can only be understood in the real grubby detail, and there alone.
Why do you think the results would be any better for Canada+ (even assuming anyone could explain the difference)?
I'd be surprised if more than 5% of people - generously - could explain what is *actually* in the Chequers proposal.
Yep.
That doesn’t matter. They’ve taken against the named idea whatever it might be. Zero legitimacy Brexit is coming.
I don’t think enough Brexiteers realise we’ll be heading straight back in off, say, Labour winning in GE2022 without Corbyn as leader on a rejoin referendum platform if that takes place.
Blame master strategists Davis, Johnson and Rees-Mogg. Athan flares.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
there's no orate
Yes, but we need to all fall in behind some form of practical Brexit that lets us move on, for now, or we risk the whole thing being immediately reversed as soon as there’s a change in Government.
I don’t want to end up in the euro in less than 10 years.
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 20%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
If people say they prefer "Canada", by and large they are just saying they like the idea of living in Canada. Drink is a bit expensive in Norway and it's a bit too cold. How does "Switzerland" do?
I love Canada and my eldest and his wife live in Vancouver and it is magical. But it is not home, and home is where the heart is and for me that is here in Llandudno
I was in Llandudno a few weeks back and I did toy with the idea of posting something here, but you were not about and I figured you might have been away on one of your cruises or some such
Wish you had and hope you enjoyed the Queen of Welsh resorts.
Came back from last cruise in early June and next one is to Canada and the US ex Southampton in Sept 19 so keeping away from Europe just in case the ports are blockaded
Why do you think the results would be any better for Canada+ (even assuming anyone could explain the difference)?
.
Blame master strategi flares.
put the blame where ir should be Cameron and Osborne called the EUref and did nothing to plan for a loss.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. legitimacy.
there's no consensus among leavers either. If we stayed on what basis would it be ?
Oddly this p[aralysis will probably produce a fudge which matches mood of the electorate
I suspect .
it.
I haven’t rejected Chequers. I have read it, and seem to be one of the very few that has.
I.
I’ve read it. At the time it was published I suggested that it would be just about the bounds of acceptability, but that I didn’t see the EU accepting it.
They haven’t. And May isn’t going to be able to sell it to the British people either. Time to move on to something else.
But, from the Guardian article, there are straws in the wind that the EU counteroffer will be very similar.
Yes, I read that too.
But I also listened to the French Europe minister on R4 last week, and saw the cool European reaction to the way the British press read too much into Barnier’s comments last week.
The offer will be something like NI backstop and free movement.
Both of which won’t be anywhere near possible for us to accept.
I wouldn’t take too much notice of either the press or the politicians.
This can only be understood in the real grubby detail, and there alone.
That’s what I keep coming back to. We won’t pass the backstop that Europe wants. Wouldn’t get more than the payroll vote, and would probably lead to a wave of resignations.
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 22%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
Oh don't be ridiculous. It's only politics. There are much more important things to worry about. Like who is going to open the batting for England, for a start.
It has been more than 20 months since England had a century opening partnership. It hardly matters who they pick as they can do little worse.
On Brexit so many are beating themselves up over their various positions as the media speculates, usually from a remain position, when we are nearing the end of an intense negotiation
We all learn a lot on here and I do hope I can keep an open mind and be persuaded. But to be persuaded I need to see the deal and in the meantime I try to keep my sanity and be relaxed
The only thing I am not relaxed about is Corbyn and his cabal and I shall never be reconciled to his political views and see nothing in him that is a redeeming factor
I honestly thought that from Corbyn the only way was up. Apparently not.
I am going to listen to his road show tomorrow night. He is a bit left wing for me TBH
We will expect a full report with clear, objective and impartial assessments in the great tradition of PB men/women on the spot.
Was it not @Bunnco who used to always be our man on the spot? Not read him for a while.
Coincidentally, I was at the Royal Albert Hall last night for the Boston Symphony Orchestra concert. At one point I looked across to my left and saw none other than John McDonnell a mere four seats away. The main work was Shostakovich 4, which the composer himself supressed shortly before it was due to premiere in 1936 for fear of how Stalin would respond to it. Who I wonder did McDonnell identify with? Composer or tyrant?
Do bear in mind that every time someone says Blairite as a term of abuse or criticises Labour 97-10 I think of all the work I put in and think "sod off - do it yourself if you're so great"
It's time for the Corbynites to love or at least show a bit of respect the Blairites. You're in the leadership role now, you need to show some.
I respect anyone who wants a Labour Government and is prepared to work along side me to get one.
I hope that includes you. We know it doesn't include Woodcock and would doubt if it includes serial Corbyn haters in the PLP.
Surely you can muster an inkling of respect for the fact that through an enormous amount of hard work and by listening to the electorate, we managed to end 18yrs of Tory rule and secure the biggest Labour vote ever.
It didn't happen by accident and many people benefited as a result.
Can you bring yourself to accept and respect that?
Course I can.I was working my ass off alongside you in 1997 and right up until Iraq. Labour was fantastic for Public Services that were on their knees under the Tories. Minimum wage was a great achievement
Why do you think I didn't like and respect New Labour. Iraq was super important to me though.
Now is the time to unite to get another Labour Government that can achieve great things.
Well next time you're about to pull the trigger and slag off a Blairite for the 1000th time or say stuff about New Labour losing votes over 13 years (as if that would not be a thing in any govt) - realise that you're pushing people like me away.
Meanwhile, Corbyn should be seeking to strengthen the Labour coalition, but for the life of me he doesn't seem to want to do it. MacDonnell gives it a go sometimes, but Corbyn not so much. it's odd, because it would be so easy.
There should be something in a future Labour govt for the whole party, not just whatever clique happens to be in charge at any given moment.
Did you not like the 2017 manifesto?
Corbyn added over 4m votes compared to 2010 in 2017 Can't for the life of me understand why you won't get behind him for the greater good of kicking out the Tories.
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Oh don't be ridiculous. It's only politics. There are much more important things to worry about. Like who is going to open the batting for England, for a start.
It has been more than 20 months since England had a century opening partnership. It hardly matters who they pick as they can do little worse.
Wow. That is a long time. It looks like that at the same time as we are trying to find an opening partnership we are also going to see what life is going to be like after Broad and Anderson. Going to be a bumpy ride this winter.
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
Christ. Imagine how demented and divorced from reality (even for an inbred upper class twit) you'd have to be to say things like that with a straight face and actually believe them.
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
I can't do both? Given the choice of any Labour government or any Tory government I go Labour without hesitation. Even the bored morally questionable Labour government of 2005 was better than Mad Frankie Howard - and the Tories nullified Iraq as an issue by being in full support of it.
Leaders come and go. I am staying in my party, fighting harder than ever to be a voice for sanity fact and reason. I stepped off our CLP Exec to fight for a council seat knowing that we need sane Councillors (and my successor as Secretary is also sane).
What I am not going to do is flounce off from the Labour Party leaving it to die with the crazies. I'm not backing some splinter scab group which splits our vote and keeps a Tory government I find base level morally wrong in power. The way to defeat Corbynism is inside the party. Not gifting them the party and gifting the Tories the entire country.
Again, what is evil? To me Tory policies on the disabled are evil. On Adult social care. A generation facing worse prospects than I had including my 17 year old son. The gathering destruction of local government so that we hand his generation literally nothing but debt and broken services all whilst doubling the national debt. I despise racism. But there is petty racism everywhere and I don't see a huge difference in the Tories - its not news that petty racism exists there, its a selling point for Boris and Goldsmith et al. So why should I gift them power and let them destroy so many people's lives just to satisfy your definition of what you consider to be evil?
Corbyn added over 4m votes compared to 2010 in 2017 Can't for the life of me understand why you won't get behind him for the greater good of kicking out the Tories.
But hey ho each to their own.
2017 was all about Brexit and denying the Tories a free reign.
The Labour manifesto read like a greatest hits album, borrowed heavily from 1997 (not that Corbyn could admit that) and was a great effort considering it was thrown together with zero notice.
But there was nothing new in there. Nothing particularly radical, challenging or future-looking.
That's what makes Labour, Labour IMO. Just imagine how mindblowing the NHS was when it was new. We don't even come remotely close.
Oh don't be ridiculous. It's only politics. There are much more important things to worry about. Like who is going to open the batting for England, for a start.
It has been more than 20 months since England had a century opening partnership. It hardly matters who they pick as they can do little worse.
Wow. That is a long time. It looks like that at the same time as we are trying to find an opening partnership we are also going to see what life is going to be like after Broad and Anderson. Going to be a bumpy ride this winter.
The last thing I heard Jimmy was going to carry on till he is 40 ! That said it might be wishful thinking/something positive to say. He's bowled over 31,000 balls in test matches already. Noone else is within a thousand balls bowled, it's a quick career of simply astonishing longevity. Hopefully he can get McGrath's fast record in the final test.
"Among those indoctrinated with alt-liberalism, older liberal values are inverted...Minority identities are actively embraced, but not all of them equally. The state of Israel is demonised as a colonial redoubt of the hated West, and racial slurs that would be furiously denounced if they were aimed at any other group are approved when their targets are Jews."
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
I think they start with that presumption because it is such obvious betty swollocks, only the westminster bubble nutters and their dwindling followers in squalid holes like this have whipped themselves into a fury over such paper-thin nonsense (basically what amounts to a handful of pro-palestinian activists getting a bit overexcited and stupid in their condemnation of Israel, something like 0.01% of the party max) and everyone else sees it as the politically-motivated balderdash it is.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
Christ. Imagine how demented and divorced from reality (even for an inbred upper class twit) you'd have to be to say things like that with a straight face and actually believe them.
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Very true, the PB Tories , are in full hyperbole mode, to discredit every Labour supporter .
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 22%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
No we won't, most likely after we have reduced immigration a bit we rejoin the single market not the Euro. It was immigration and sovereignty which led to Brexit and much of the cause for stagnant wages was uncontrolled low skilled immigration.
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
Oh don't be ridiculous. It's only politics. There are much more important things to worry about. Like who is going to open the batting for England, for a start.
It has been more than 20 months since England had a century opening partnership. It hardly matters who they pick as they can do little worse.
Wow. That is a long time. It looks like that at the same time as we are trying to find an opening partnership we are also going to see what life is going to be like after Broad and Anderson. Going to be a bumpy ride this winter.
The last thing I heard Jimmy was going to carry on till he is 40 ! That said it might be wishful thinking/something positive to say. He's bowled over 31,000 balls in test matches already. Noone else is within a thousand balls bowled, it's a quick career of simply astonishing longevity. Hopefully he can get McGrath's fast record in the final test.
All the more extraordinary, given that he was out of the test side for a good three years I think between 2004 and 2007.
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 22%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
No we won't, most likely after we have reduced immigration a bit we rejoin the single market not the Euro.
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
I loved HYUFD world where voters never ever change their minds.
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
I think they start with that presumption because it is such obvious betty swollocks, only the westminster bubble nutters and their dwindling followers in squalid holes like this have whipped themselves into a fury over such paper-thin nonsense (basically what amounts to a handful of pro-palestinian activists getting a bit overexcited and stupid in their condemnation of Israel, something like 0.01% of the party max) and everyone else sees it as the politically-motivated balderdash it is.
"Among those indoctrinated with alt-liberalism, older liberal values are inverted...Minority identities are actively embraced, but not all of them equally. The state of Israel is demonised as a colonial redoubt of the hated West, and racial slurs that would be furiously denounced if they were aimed at any other group are approved when their targets are Jews."
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 22%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
No we won't, most likely after we have reduced immigration a bit we rejoin the single market not the Euro.
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
I loved HYUFD world where voters never ever change their minds.
You can change your mind in a 52% to 48% vote, had the Eurozone been a requirement of staying in the EU it would have been nearly 70% to 30% Leave and there is no changing mind there.
The Eurozone as I said means you hand over your economy to Germany for ever more
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 22%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
No we won't, most likely after we have reduced immigration a bit we rejoin the single market not the Euro.
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
I loved HYUFD world where voters never ever change their minds.
As opposed to a world where you don't implement what voters voted for - in a referendum and a subsequent general election where parties committed to Brexit got 86 per cent of the vote - but ask them to keep voting to reverse their decision until they deliver the 'correct' result.
Very little of any substance or difficulty would ever have been delivered in our history if you operated on the basis of ebbs and flows in opinion polls. Mrs Thatcher for example would have been deposed in 1981 on that basis.
Of course had we believed the majority of polls rather than actual votes Ed Milliband would have become PM in 2015, Remain would have won by up to 10 per cent, Hillary had a 98 per cent chance of becoming Preisdent and Mrs May would have won with a majority of over 100 in June last year.
And assuming we have this people's vote can we even agree on what the question or questions on the ballot paper would be? Not that there is any electoral mandate anyway for it as there was for the 2016 vote.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
Christ. Imagine how demented and divorced from reality (even for an inbred upper class twit) you'd have to be to say things like that with a straight face and actually believe them.
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Very true, the PB Tories , are in full hyperbole mode, to discredit every Labour supporter .
That is not fair. I have written several posts supporting RochdalePioneers and other labour supporters who are genuinely conflicted.
However, I make no apology for calling out Corbyn and the company he choses, his anti west, anti NATO, anti capitalism, pro Hamas, IRA, and Iran and an apologist for Putin's use of a nerve agent on the streets of Salisbury
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
I believe Jeremy Corbyn is evil. That’s not a word I use lightly. Anti-Semitism is also evil.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 22%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
No we won't, most likely after we have reduced immigration a bit we rejoin the single market not the Euro.
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
I loved HYUFD world where voters never ever change their minds.
As opposed to a world where you don't implement what voters voted for - in a referendum and a subsequent general election where parties committed to Brexit got 86 per cent of the vote - but ask them to keep voting to reverse their decision until they deliver the 'correct' result.
Very little of any substance or difficulty would ever have been delivered in our history if you operated on the basis of ebbs and flows in opinion polls. Mrs Thatcher for example would have been deposed in 1981 on that basis.
I'm in favour of implementing Brexit.
What I'm saying is that the Brexit Vote Leave promised is undeliverable and that will cause huge problems for Leavers as Casino Royale has identified.
If the voters concluded that Brexit is bad for them they'll vote to overturn it just in the same way they vote to overturn the government they previously voted for.
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
Christ. Imagine how demented and divorced from reality (even for an inbred upper class twit) you'd have to be to say things like that with a straight face and actually believe them.
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Very true, the PB Tories , are in full hyperbole mode, to discredit every Labour supporter .
No. I just don’t think you benefit by hanging around with people like those who infest Labour at the moment
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
I believe Jeremy Corbyn is evil. That’s not a word I use lightly. Anti-Semitism is also evil.
I and many others thought Thatcher to be evil. Ditto Blair post- Iraq.
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 22%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
No we won't, most likely after we have reduced immigration a bit we rejoin the single market not the Euro.
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
I loved HYUFD world where voters never ever change their minds.
As opposed to a world where you don't implement what voters voted for - in a referendum and a subsequent general election where parties committed to Brexit got 86 per cent of the vote - but ask them to keep voting to reverse their decision until they deliver the 'correct' result.
Very little of any substance or difficulty would ever have been delivered in our history if you operated on the basis of ebbs and flows in opinion polls. Mrs Thatcher for example would have been deposed in 1981 on that basis.
I'm in favour of implementing Brexit.
What I'm saying is that the Brexit Vote Leave promised is undeliverable and that will cause huge problems for Leavers as Casino Royale has identified.
If the voters concluded that Brexit is bad for them they'll vote to overturn it just in the same way they vote to overturn the government they previously voted for.
They can only vote to change it with another referendum or a GE where one party (not lib dems) say they will remain in the EU
Tonights poll is the first real evidence of a move to UKIP and leave though I do not understand 4% lib dems gone to UKIP
The trend will be interesting over the next couple of months
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
Christ. Imagine how demented and divorced from reality (even for an inbred upper class twit) you'd have to be to say things like that with a straight face and actually believe them.
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Very true, the PB Tories , are in full hyperbole mode, to discredit every Labour supporter .
That is not fair. I have written several posts supporting RochdalePioneers and other labour supporters who are genuinely conflicted.
However, I make no apology for calling out Corbyn and the company he choses, his anti west, anti NATO, anti capitalism, pro Hamas, IRA, and Iran and an apologist for Putin's use of a nerve agent on the streets of Salisbury
When did Corbyn apologise for Putin's use of nerve agent in Salisbury Big_G?
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
I believe Jeremy Corbyn is evil. That’s not a word I use lightly. Anti-Semitism is also evil.
I and many others thought Thatcher to be evil. Ditto Blair post- Iraq.
So at the time I'd expect you not to vote for her or him.
The issue is people who view their own leader as evil but still vote for them because at least they're not *opposition party*
In my view the UK and USA between them have 2 evil leaders. Trump and Corbyn. Someone who sees what is wrong with Corbyn but still seeks to get him elected PM as he isn't a Tory is the same as a GOP voter who sees what is wrong with Trump but voted for him as at least he's not a Democrat.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
I believe Jeremy Corbyn is evil. That’s not a word I use lightly. Anti-Semitism is also evil.
I and many others thought Thatcher to be evil. Ditto Blair post- Iraq.
So at the time I'd expect you not to vote for her or him.
The issue is people who view their own leader as evil but still vote for them because at least they're not *opposition party*
In my view the UK and USA between them have 2 evil leaders. Trump and Corbyn. Someone who sees what is wrong with Corbyn but still seeks to get him elected PM as he isn't a Tory is the same as a GOP voter who sees what is wrong with Trump but voted for him as at least he's not a Democrat.
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
No we won't, most likely after we have reduced immigration a bit we rejoin the single market not the Euro.
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
I loved HYUFD world where voters never ever change their minds.
As opposed to a world where you don't implement what voters voted for - in a referendum and a subsequent general election where parties committed to Brexit got 86 per cent of the vote - but ask them to keep voting to reverse their decision until they deliver the 'correct' result.
Very little of any substance or difficulty would ever have been delivered in our history if you operated on the basis of ebbs and flows in opinion polls. Mrs Thatcher for example would have been deposed in 1981 on that basis.
I'm in favour of implementing Brexit.
What I'm saying is that the Brexit Vote Leave promised is undeliverable and that will cause huge problems for Leavers as Casino Royale has identified.
If the voters concluded that Brexit is bad for them they'll vote to overturn it just in the same way they vote to overturn the government they previously voted for.
They can only vote to change it with another referendum or a GE where one party (not lib dems) say they will remain in the EU
Tonights poll is the first real evidence of a move to UKIP and leave though I do not understand 4% lib dems gone to UKIP
The trend will be interesting over the next couple of months
If this poll is at all accurate - and that remains to be seen - there is likely to have been a lot of churn with the Tories losing votes to UKIP and the LibDems to Labour. 6% seems suspiciously low for the LibDems though.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
Christ. Imagine how demented and divorced from reality (even for an inbred upper class twit) you'd have to be to say things like that with a straight face and actually believe them.
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Very true, the PB Tories , are in full hyperbole mode, to discredit every Labour supporter .
That is not fair. I have written several posts supporting RochdalePioneers and other labour supporters who are genuinely conflicted.
However, I make no apology for calling out Corbyn and the company he choses, his anti west, anti NATO, anti capitalism, pro Hamas, IRA, and Iran and an apologist for Putin's use of a nerve agent on the streets of Salisbury
When did Corbyn apologise for Putin's use of nerve agent in Salisbury Big_G?
He failed to condemn Putin and was widely attacked over it.
See the recent nerve agent attack was the same nerve agent used on the Skipals according to the OPCW today
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
I believe Jeremy Corbyn is evil. That’s not a word I use lightly. Anti-Semitism is also evil.
I and many others thought Thatcher to be evil. Ditto Blair post- Iraq.
So at the time I'd expect you not to vote for her or him.
The issue is people who view their own leader as evil but still vote for them because at least they're not *opposition party*
In my view the UK and USA between them have 2 evil leaders. Trump and Corbyn. Someone who sees what is wrong with Corbyn but still seeks to get him elected PM as he isn't a Tory is the same as a GOP voter who sees what is wrong with Trump but voted for him as at least he's not a Democrat.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
I believe Jeremy Corbyn is evil. That’s not a word I use lightly. Anti-Semitism is also evil.
I and many others thought Thatcher to be evil. Ditto Blair post- Iraq.
So at the time I'd expect you not to vote for her or him.
The issue is people who view their own leader as evil but still vote for them because at least they're not *opposition party*
In my view the UK and USA between them have 2 evil leaders. Trump and Corbyn. Someone who sees what is wrong with Corbyn but still seeks to get him elected PM as he isn't a Tory is the same as a GOP voter who sees what is wrong with Trump but voted for him as at least he's not a Democrat.
Corbyn isn't evil, he's inept.
He's a left wing Donald Trump. A racist hatemonger.
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
File under 'wishful thinking'.
I am interested in which organisations you think constitutes the MSM. Does it include the Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph and Times, all of whom hardly gave Corbyn a free pass in GE2017?
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
And he will face a real debate with a new conservative leader - Boris ( I hope not) or Javid
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
He's going to be defensive, probably on the edge of snapping in a bunch of interviews, narked that everyone STILL wants to ask him about anti-semitism when that is SO last year....
He won't be a shiny new thing next time. Just an aged anti-semite, looking older by five years, weighed down by an evil idea.
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
I believe Jeremy Corbyn is evil. That’s not a word I use lightly. Anti-Semitism is also evil.
I and many others thought Thatcher to be evil. Ditto Blair post- Iraq.
So at the time I'd expect you not to vote for her or him.
The issue is people who view their own leader as evil but still vote for them because at least they're not *opposition party*
In my view the UK and USA between them have 2 evil leaders. Trump and Corbyn. Someone who sees what is wrong with Corbyn but still seeks to get him elected PM as he isn't a Tory is the same as a GOP voter who sees what is wrong with Trump but voted for him as at least he's not a Democrat.
Corbyn isn't evil, he's inept.
Which, given those who stand behind him, makes him dangerous to much of what I believe the UK stands for/ needs
Very very few people get the opportunity to vote for what they want. For a candidate who is perfect. For a party offering a flawless manifesto. For a leader who inspires and becalms. Its all shades of grey. So regardless of the wazzocks surrounding Jeremy Corbyn people wanting a Labour government will still vote Labour. Because the alternative is a Tory government.
Fed up trapped in insecure tenancies with dodgy landlords. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? Working all the hours God sends and still barely able to pay bills. Should they vote Tory because Jeremy Corbyn? The decimation of local government, the cuts to the NHS and Adult Social Care, driving the disabled to die in abject poverty - do none of these count because of anti-semitism?
Of will most voters continue to do as they do - vote on the issues that affect them. And not vote to make themselves continue to suffer just because a Tory tells them they are immoral.
You are conflating 2 questions:
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
A somewhat over-inflated use of the word 'evil'! Always worth keeping something in the tank in case Charles Manson should happen to pass by
I believe Jeremy Corbyn is evil. That’s not a word I use lightly. Anti-Semitism is also evil.
I and many others thought Thatcher to be evil. Ditto Blair post- Iraq.
Plenty of public sector workers thought George Osborne was evil, it all depends on whose viewpoint it comes from.
In politics though it is probably better to be thought evil by your opponents than weak
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
File under 'wishful thinking'.
I am interested in which organisations you think constitutes the MSM. Does it include the Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph and Times, all of whom hardly gave Corbyn a free pass in GE2017?
Broadcasters are still the key for swinging things. It may be wishful thinking but you can't deny that almost everyone was expecting a Tory win. Facing the prospect of Corbyn actually becoming PM will sober up some who voted for him last time.
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
File under 'wishful thinking'.
I am interested in which organisations you think constitutes the MSM. Does it include the Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph and Times, all of whom hardly gave Corbyn a free pass in GE2017?
Sky and BBC and ITV are the important broadcast media though the mail and sun have a large online presence
If he’s having to take that line with ministers before even starting on the backbenchers his chances aren’t looking too good. As far as I can see Chequers would only get passed with much of its support coming from Labour MPs scared of no deal, and being aligned with that group of ‘winners’ wouldn’t really help in the inevitable Tory leadership contest to follow shortly after.
Academic anyway as there won’t be anything resembling Chequers that the EU agree to.
'Is one problem with a Canada type deal that Canada is not geographically in Europe? Does all trade, commerce, business occur purely independent from geography? Or is there something fundamental fusing commerce and geography that has been there since the word dot, that is not of but in spite of the hideous EU superstate that came along and we took dislike to?'
Interestingly last week the Canadian conservatives decided to include a commitment to a free trade deal and freedom of movement - including reciprocal healthcare agreements - for workers and retirees with the UK, Australia and NZ in their 2019 election manifesto. Clearly they don't see distance as a barrier but a common language and culture and shared legal and political systems as being as important.
I doubt it will go anywhere - although the Canadian Tories have closed on Trudeau's Liberals in the polls - but wouldn't it be nice if Brits had freedom of movement with countries they actually wanted to move to?!
I think many voters sympathetic to Labour haven't paid a great deal of attention and start with the presumption that the leader of a major British party can't really be an extremist nut job. Labour is a powerful brand.They are also skeptical about claims of racism given that they are bandied about freely these days with rules that change daily and which nobody really understands. There is also the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. I will remind everyone that the wolf did indeed arrive and eat the flock.
Didn't it eat the boy?
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
I do not swallow that line at all - and people have so quickly forgotten how negative the perceptions of Corbyn were in the early months of 2017 at the time of the Copeland by election and beyond. I have never been a great admirer, but am quite clear in my mind that he was far deeper in the mire then than he is today.I share many of the criticisms of his past comments , but the Anti - Semitic affair is not a salient issue outside a handful of constituencies - as tonight's poll perhaps confirms.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
Here's a curious thing (possibly a worthwhile thread header perhaps)
During the campaign, the plucky Brexiteers led by BoZo and Gove outwitted the leaden remainers, overwhelmed the Goverment spending and propaganda machines, outmanoeuvred the experts, defeated the establishment and vanquished the doubters.
Then the same dream team were promoted into Government to deliver.
And now, the reason they give that Brexit will be symbolised by truckers crapping on the motorway is "Remainers wouldn't let us do it..."
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
Christ. Imagine how demented and divorced from reality (even for an inbred upper class twit) you'd have to be to say things like that with a straight face and actually believe them.
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Very true, the PB Tories , are in full hyperbole mode, to discredit every Labour supporter .
That is not fair. I have written several posts supporting RochdalePioneers and other labour supporters who are genuinely conflicted.
However, I make no apology for calling out Corbyn and the company he choses, his anti west, anti NATO, anti capitalism, pro Hamas, IRA, and Iran and an apologist for Putin's use of a nerve agent on the streets of Salisbury
When did Corbyn apologise for Putin's use of nerve agent in Salisbury Big_G?
He failed to condemn Putin and was widely attacked over it.
See the recent nerve agent attack was the same nerve agent used on the Skipals according to the OPCW today
Sounds desperate given Theresa was a "loser" at the general election and she's lost the only proven "winner" (Boris) from her Cabinet....
Boris is a loser. Did in his words diddly squat at the FO and flounced off in a pathetic gesture.
Neither of us know how true this statement is but it must be based on his findings and make no bones about it Boris has angered a large number of his fellow conservative mps
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
Here's a curious thing (possibly a worthwhile thread header perhaps)
During the campaign, the plucky Brexiteers led by BoZo and Gove outwitted the leaden remainers, overwhelmed the Goverment spending and propaganda machines, outmanoeuvred the experts, defeated the establishment and vanquished the doubters.
Then the same dream team were promoted into Government to deliver.
And now, the reason they give that Brexit will be symbolised by truckers crapping on the motorway is "Remainers wouldn't let us do it..."
It's astonishing (and faintly pathetic)
Because Cameron liften collective responsibility and allowed the Leavers to campaign freely.
May reinstated collective responsibility and vetoed any actions by the leavers.
David Davis realised what a disaster the EU's sequencing would be and vowed "the fight of the summer" over it, only to be told on day 1 that May was agreeing to the EU's sequencing. Ditto every conflict since, May just rolls over and vetoes any conflict.
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
File under 'wishful thinking'.
I am interested in which organisations you think constitutes the MSM. Does it include the Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph and Times, all of whom hardly gave Corbyn a free pass in GE2017?
Broadcasters are still the key for swinging things. It may be wishful thinking but you can't deny that almost everyone was expecting a Tory win. Facing the prospect of Corbyn actually becoming PM will sober up some who voted for him last time.
In the last ten days of the 2017 campaign there were quite a few polls which pointed to the serious possibility of a Hung Parliament - particularly in the context of the Tory surge in Scotland which implied underperformance elsewhere in GB. Some of us did point this out at the time.
Curious, I looked up "evil" and found a list of synonyms as long as one's arm. But none of them seemed to be measureable except in its psychological effect on the experiencer or visualiser---raised hackles, nausea, and so on. I guess "evil" is relative. If aliens one day survey Earth for a planet to colonise they would be wise to buzz off. Or maybe do a sweep.
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
Christ. Imagine how demented and divorced from reality (even for an inbred upper class twit) you'd have to be to say things like that with a straight face and actually believe them.
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Very true, the PB Tories , are in full hyperbole mode, to discredit every Labour supporter .
That is not fair. I have written several posts supporting RochdalePioneers and other labour supporters who are genuinely conflicted.
However, I make no apology for calling out Corbyn and the company he choses, his anti west, anti NATO, anti capitalism, pro Hamas, IRA, and Iran and an apologist for Putin's use of a nerve agent on the streets of Salisbury
When did Corbyn apologise for Putin's use of nerve agent in Salisbury Big_G?
He failed to condemn Putin and was widely attacked over it.
See the recent nerve agent attack was the same nerve agent used on the Skipals according to the OPCW today
Sounds desperate given Theresa was a "loser" at the general election and she's lost the only proven "winner" (Boris) from her Cabinet....
Boris is a loser. Did in his words diddly squat at the FO and flounced off in a pathetic gesture.
Neither of us know how true this statement is but it must be based on his findings and make no bones about it Boris has angered a large number of his fellow conservative mps
Boris is a proven, three time election winner (two mayoral contests and on the winning side of the referendum)
Remind me how many elections Theresa's won? The one and only general election she fought as leader saw her blowing a 25% polling lead in four weeks...
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
Here's a curious thing (possibly a worthwhile thread header perhaps)
During the campaign, the plucky Brexiteers led by BoZo and Gove outwitted the leaden remainers, overwhelmed the Goverment spending and propaganda machines, outmanoeuvred the experts, defeated the establishment and vanquished the doubters.
Then the same dream team were promoted into Government to deliver.
And now, the reason they give that Brexit will be symbolised by truckers crapping on the motorway is "Remainers wouldn't let us do it..."
It's astonishing (and faintly pathetic)
To be fair, Gove has been both pragmatic and realistic.
So far, he’s also the only Government minister able to signpost how policy will be demonstrably better in his department once we’ve left the EU.
It ate the sheep in the version I read, otherwise he couldn't have run down to the village to give the true alarm that was disbelieved. Eating both would fit the analogy well enough. I still think that in another election campaign Corbyn will lose votes from his starting position rather than gaining them as in the last one.
That is rather a brave forecast. I very much doubt that Corbyn will receive the big boost he enjoyed in 2017 - if only because he appears to be starting from a much higher level of support. Against that , he is in his element when in campaign mode and it is much more likely to be a case of how far his opponents can limit his advance. Moreover, contrary to what many believe , it is very much the 'norm' for the Opposition to move forward during the formal election campaign period.
I think he will get more critical attention in the MSM as he will now be seen as a prospective PM and a lot of the people who voted for him last time will also now see him as a genuine contender rather than someone they can vote for to reduce the Tory majority. They will pay more attention and start thinking about the implications of a Corbyn government. During the last campaign contradictions were well hidden that will probably be more apparent. The views of many who voted for Corbyn and Corbyn's own views are as wide apart in reality as say labour right wing to Tory right wing.
File under 'wishful thinking'.
I am interested in which organisations you think constitutes the MSM. Does it include the Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph and Times, all of whom hardly gave Corbyn a free pass in GE2017?
Broadcasters are still the key for swinging things. It may be wishful thinking but you can't deny that almost everyone was expecting a Tory win. Facing the prospect of Corbyn actually becoming PM will sober up some who voted for him last time.
In the last ten days of the 2017 campaign there were quite a few polls which pointed to the serious possibility of a Hung Parliament - particularly in the context of the Tory surge in Scotland which implied underperformance elsewhere in GB. Some of us did point this out at the time.
True but I'm pretty certain that the vast majority of voters cast their vote on the expectation of a Tory majority.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
Here's a curious thing (possibly a worthwhile thread header perhaps)
During the campaign, the plucky Brexiteers led by BoZo and Gove outwitted the leaden remainers, overwhelmed the Goverment spending and propaganda machines, outmanoeuvred the experts, defeated the establishment and vanquished the doubters.
Then the same dream team were promoted into Government to deliver.
And now, the reason they give that Brexit will be symbolised by truckers crapping on the motorway is "Remainers wouldn't let us do it..."
It's astonishing (and faintly pathetic)
Because Cameron liften collective responsibility and allowed the Leavers to campaign freely.
May reinstated collective responsibility and vetoed any actions by the leavers.
David Davis realised what a disaster the EU's sequencing would be and vowed "the fight of the summer" over it, only to be told on day 1 that May was agreeing to the EU's sequencing. Ditto every conflict since, May just rolls over and vetoes any conflict.
What were these actions the leavers would have taken which were vetoed? They seem to be curiously unwilling to explain their solutions to the challenges of a real-world Brexit at a time when you might expect them to be keen to talk about them in some detail.
Responsibity-avoiding Leaver alert. Since in 2018 there is no consensus among Leavers about what Leave should look like, a Remain-supporting government could never have drawn up plans before the referendum that had legitimacy.
Here's a curious thing (possibly a worthwhile thread header perhaps)
During the campaign, the plucky Brexiteers led by BoZo and Gove outwitted the leaden remainers, overwhelmed the Goverment spending and propaganda machines, outmanoeuvred the experts, defeated the establishment and vanquished the doubters.
Then the same dream team were promoted into Government to deliver.
And now, the reason they give that Brexit will be symbolised by truckers crapping on the motorway is "Remainers wouldn't let us do it..."
It's astonishing (and faintly pathetic)
To be fair, Gove has been both pragmatic and realistic.
So far, he’s also the only Government minister able to signpost how policy will be demonstrably better in his department once we’ve left the EU.
We will not end up in the Euro even if we did narrowly reverse Brexit, only 33% of voters back the Euro, 10% less than back no Deal Brexit and 20% less than voted Leave.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 22%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
If Brexit leads to a long term economic slump then we'll join.
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
No we won't, most likely after we have reduced immigration a bit we rejoin the single market not the Euro.
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
I loved HYUFD world where voters never ever change their minds.
As opposed to a world where you don't implement what voters voted for - in a referendum and a subsequent general election where parties committed to Brexit got 86 per cent of the vote - but ask them to keep voting to reverse their decision until they deliver the 'correct' result.
Very little of any substance or difficulty would ever have been delivered in our history if you operated on the basis of ebbs and flows in opinion polls. Mrs Thatcher for example would have been deposed in 1981 on that basis.
I'm in favour of implementing Brexit.
What I'm saying is that the Brexit Vote Leave promised is undeliverable and that will cause huge problems for Leavers as Casino Royale has identified.
If the voters concluded that Brexit is bad for them they'll vote to overturn it just in the same way they vote to overturn the government they previously voted for.
Just to be clear, I didn’t say the Vote Leave mandate was undeliverable. Only that Leavers should get behind a pragmatic negotiated Brexit so we can secure it and move on.
I agree with Robert Smithson that Brexit is a (long term) process. The Treaty of Rome wasn’t unbuilt in a day.
Comments
Was it not @Bunnco who used to always be our man on the spot? Not read him for a while.
Wondering how much money Mr W will be losing in return for this thread header.
It would also make me look like Nostradamus
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-brexiteers-junckers-fifth-columnists/
But I also listened to the French Europe minister on R4 last week, and saw the cool European reaction to the way the British press read too much into Barnier’s comments last week.
The offer will be something like NI backstop and free movement.
Both of which won’t be anywhere near possible for us to accept.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1037032301098610688?s=19
This can only be understood in the real grubby detail, and there alone.
Though of course if the UK joined the Euro it would be the final confirmation of German domination of Europe achieved by peaceful means, after all look at the stats, French unemployment 9%, Italian Unemployment 10%, Spanish unemployment 16%, Greek unemployment 20%.
German unemployment 4%. Germany also has a higher gdp per capita than all of them. Not hard to see who most benefits from the Euro there
(1) in a forced choice (for simplicity) between Corbyn’s Labour and the Tories how do you vote?
and
(2) should I, as an activist, work to get a anti-Semite to the position of PM or should I work to offer a decent, healthy alternative to the Tories?
I’m saddened by you @RochdalePioneers. I think you're a decent honourable man. But you are making the wrong choice and justifying evil
If stagnating wages can lead to Brexit then people will vote for something similarly bold to reverse an economic slump.
We all learn a lot on here and I do hope I can keep an open mind and be persuaded. But to be persuaded I need to see the deal and in the meantime I try to keep my sanity and be relaxed
The only thing I am not relaxed about is Corbyn and his cabal and I shall never be reconciled to his political views and see nothing in him that is a redeeming factor
@EuropeElects
1h1 hour ago
UK, Survation poll:
EU membership ref
Remain: 50% (-2)
Leave: 50% (+2)"
"The Conservative party does not want Britain to leave the EU. Anyone who says differently is telling a lie."
I don't think that the PB Tories realise that by being so absolutely mendaciously and ostentatiously mad like this they are actually more likely to drive the genuine labour right-wingers back into the fold.
Leaders come and go. I am staying in my party, fighting harder than ever to be a voice for sanity fact and reason. I stepped off our CLP Exec to fight for a council seat knowing that we need sane Councillors (and my successor as Secretary is also sane).
What I am not going to do is flounce off from the Labour Party leaving it to die with the crazies. I'm not backing some splinter scab group which splits our vote and keeps a Tory government I find base level morally wrong in power. The way to defeat Corbynism is inside the party. Not gifting them the party and gifting the Tories the entire country.
Again, what is evil? To me Tory policies on the disabled are evil. On Adult social care. A generation facing worse prospects than I had including my 17 year old son. The gathering destruction of local government so that we hand his generation literally nothing but debt and broken services all whilst doubling the national debt. I despise racism. But there is petty racism everywhere and I don't see a huge difference in the Tories - its not news that petty racism exists there, its a selling point for Boris and Goldsmith et al. So why should I gift them power and let them destroy so many people's lives just to satisfy your definition of what you consider to be evil?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jul/10/uk.eu
The Labour manifesto read like a greatest hits album, borrowed heavily from 1997 (not that Corbyn could admit that) and was a great effort considering it was thrown together with zero notice.
But there was nothing new in there. Nothing particularly radical, challenging or future-looking.
That's what makes Labour, Labour IMO. Just imagine how mindblowing the NHS was when it was new. We don't even come remotely close.
Hopefully he can get McGrath's fast record in the final test.
John Gray (my bold)
https://unherd.com/2018/09/the-rise-of-the-post-truth-liberals/?utm_source=UnHerd+Today&utm_campaign=33200087c9-May1_Subject-Test_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_79fd0df946-33200087c9-34688281
A comfortable 2/3 of voters oppose the Euro and of course the day we join the Euro is the day the UK ceases to be an independent state effectively, as I said the Euro has enabled Germany to peacefully rule Europe in a way it was never to achieve by warlike means longer term in WW2.
As I also pointed out the idea joining the Eurozone would help the economy is absurd, tell that to Greece with 20% unemployment, all the Eurozone means is that Germany dictates your economic policy for ever more
But don't worry peoples.
"means" means "means",
and "Brexit" means "Brexit".
The Eurozone as I said means you hand over your economy to Germany for ever more
http://m.atwonline.com/aircraft-orders-deliveries/new-chinese-regional-startup-orders-arj21s
Very little of any substance or difficulty would ever have been delivered in our history if you operated on the basis of ebbs and flows in opinion polls. Mrs Thatcher for example would have been deposed in 1981 on that basis.
Of course had we believed the majority of polls rather than actual votes Ed Milliband would have become PM in 2015, Remain would have won by up to 10 per cent, Hillary had a 98 per cent chance of becoming Preisdent and Mrs May would have won with a majority of over 100 in June last year.
And assuming we have this people's vote can we even agree on what the question or questions on the ballot paper would be? Not that there is any electoral mandate anyway for it as there was for the 2016 vote.
However, I make no apology for calling out Corbyn and the company he choses, his anti west, anti NATO, anti capitalism, pro Hamas, IRA, and Iran and an apologist for Putin's use of a nerve agent on the streets of Salisbury
What I'm saying is that the Brexit Vote Leave promised is undeliverable and that will cause huge problems for Leavers as Casino Royale has identified.
If the voters concluded that Brexit is bad for them they'll vote to overturn it just in the same way they vote to overturn the government they previously voted for.
Tonights poll is the first real evidence of a move to UKIP and leave though I do not understand 4% lib dems gone to UKIP
The trend will be interesting over the next couple of months
The issue is people who view their own leader as evil but still vote for them because at least they're not *opposition party*
In my view the UK and USA between them have 2 evil leaders. Trump and Corbyn. Someone who sees what is wrong with Corbyn but still seeks to get him elected PM as he isn't a Tory is the same as a GOP voter who sees what is wrong with Trump but voted for him as at least he's not a Democrat.
See the recent nerve agent attack was the same nerve agent used on the Skipals according to the OPCW today
I have been away and retuned to find that nobody on this entire thread has noted the most important news of the day
Scotland have qualified for the World Cup !!!!!
I am interested in which organisations you think constitutes the MSM. Does it include the Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph and Times, all of whom hardly gave Corbyn a free pass in GE2017?
He won't be a shiny new thing next time. Just an aged anti-semite, looking older by five years, weighed down by an evil idea.
Sounds desperate given Theresa was a "loser" at the general election and she's lost the only proven "winner" (Boris) from her Cabinet....
In politics though it is probably better to be thought evil by your opponents than weak
Academic anyway as there won’t be anything resembling Chequers that the EU agree to.
'Is one problem with a Canada type deal that Canada is not geographically in Europe? Does all trade, commerce, business occur purely independent from geography? Or is there something fundamental fusing commerce and geography that has been there since the word dot, that is not of but in spite of the hideous EU superstate that came along and we took dislike to?'
Interestingly last week the Canadian conservatives decided to include a commitment to a free trade deal and freedom of movement - including reciprocal healthcare agreements - for workers and retirees with the UK, Australia and NZ in their 2019 election manifesto. Clearly they don't see distance as a barrier but a common language and culture and shared legal and political systems as being as important.
I doubt it will go anywhere - although the Canadian Tories have closed on Trudeau's Liberals in the polls - but wouldn't it be nice if Brits had freedom of movement with countries they actually wanted to move to?!
http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/conservatives-back-free-movement-canada-uk-australia-new-zealand-2018
During the campaign, the plucky Brexiteers led by BoZo and Gove outwitted the leaden remainers, overwhelmed the Goverment spending and propaganda machines, outmanoeuvred the experts, defeated the establishment and vanquished the doubters.
Then the same dream team were promoted into Government to deliver.
And now, the reason they give that Brexit will be symbolised by truckers crapping on the motorway is "Remainers wouldn't let us do it..."
It's astonishing (and faintly pathetic)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/15/salisbury-attack-conflict-britain-cold-war
As it happens, the Government has quietly followed Corbyn's recommended approach.
As for the confirmation that the recent murder was caused by the same agent, who ever doubted it and what's that got to do with Corbyn's response?
Neither of us know how true this statement is but it must be based on his findings and make no bones about it Boris has angered a large number of his fellow conservative mps
May reinstated collective responsibility and vetoed any actions by the leavers.
David Davis realised what a disaster the EU's sequencing would be and vowed "the fight of the summer" over it, only to be told on day 1 that May was agreeing to the EU's sequencing. Ditto every conflict since, May just rolls over and vetoes any conflict.
except in its psychological effect on the experiencer or visualiser---raised hackles, nausea, and so on.
I guess "evil" is relative.
If aliens one day survey Earth for a planet to colonise they would be wise to buzz off.
Or maybe do a sweep.
Remind me how many elections Theresa's won? The one and only general election she fought as leader saw her blowing a 25% polling lead in four weeks...
Against Jeremy Corbyn...
Wah, wah, wah, nasty remainer wouldn't let me do it, wah.
They should have resigned on the spot if that were true (which of course it isn't)
So far, he’s also the only Government minister able to signpost how policy will be demonstrably better in his department once we’ve left the EU.
https://twitter.com/clippednpinned/status/1036647000312307714?s=21
I agree with Robert Smithson that Brexit is a (long term) process. The Treaty of Rome wasn’t unbuilt in a day.